Hello and thank you for visiting AikiWeb, the
world's most active online Aikido community! This site is home to
over 22,000 aikido practitioners from around the world and covers a
wide range of aikido topics including techniques, philosophy, history,
humor, beginner issues, the marketplace, and more.

If you wish to join in the discussions or use the other advanced
features available, you will need to register first. Registration is
absolutely free and takes only a few minutes to complete so sign up today!

You need to let us in on the terminology you are using in order for us to understand you.

What do you mean by;

preformal,

potential realm,

martial subset

dps

Hi David,

If a concept can't be explained in plain english, then the fault lies with the explainer.

Complicated scientific principles are often explained using metaphor and good use of plain language. If a martial arts soaked audience can't understand what is being said, then there is definitely a language issue here.

There are plenty of people following the whole IS/IP/aiki debate and in the main, those who claim to have it, and those who practice and strive to master it, are engaged in the debate using, both old and new terminology. In the main just about everyone (I think) has some understanding of what is being discussed. Am I right?

Tenyu claims to have perfected something which he claims is both unique and pretty lethal. Until someone, apart from him, who can varify his claims, comes along and confirms. We only have his say so. I find his explanations impossible to get my head round. I just can't comprehend. It could just be me, but I don't think I am on my own.

If a concept can't be explained in plain english, then the fault lies with the explainer.

Complicated scientific principles are often explained using metaphor and good use of plain language. If a martial arts soaked audience can't understand what is being said, then there is definitely a language issue here.

There are plenty of people following the whole IS/IP/aiki debate and in the main, those who claim to have it, and those who practice and strive to master it, are engaged in the debate using, both old and new terminology. In the main just about everyone (I think) has some understanding of what is being discussed. Am I right?

Tenyu claims to have perfected something which he claims is both unique and pretty lethal. Until someone, apart from him, who can varify his claims, comes along and confirms. We only have his say so. I find his explanations impossible to get my head round. I just can't comprehend. It could just be me, but I don't think I am on my own.

Tenyu claims to have perfected something which he claims is both unique and pretty lethal. Until someone, apart from him, who can varify his claims, comes along and confirms.

ummmmm....Please excuse me from breaking in on a conversation that is way above my head, but just out of curiosity. Because I am trying to figure out just how one goes about determining how lethal an art is. How many people have you actually killed using this staff form Tenyu? And is the government aware of your activities? How exactly does one determine whether or not a form is lethal and to what degree? I'm not sure killing imaginary enemies really counts. Or am I mistaken?

Please excuse me from breaking in on a conversation that is way above my head, but just out of curiosity. Because I am trying to figure out just how one goes about determining how lethal an art is. How exactly does one determine whether or not a form is lethal and to what degree?

Morihei said of all the people who came to contest him in his dojo, only a few of them were real masters. He knew as soon as they walked in before anything happened and admitted such immediately, of course they were able to recognize the same with Morihei. It is the ones, the overwhelming majority of challengers, who with little experience with the preformal could not see the potential realm. Uke, by their own culturally inherited psychology of separation(please refer to Ascent of Humanity in Open Topics), by default had access only to the ‘postformal' downstream manifest world and could only find out by attacking.

When Kaicho started up in NYC, he had many challengers all of them bigger than him. They were very powerful and successful professional fight competitors, yet still uke to no fault of their own. These people meant business, interrupting his classes to challenge him. Kaicho never wanted to hurt anyone but they gave him no choice. There was never any fighting of course, Kaicho ended every situation immediately with irimi. The worst that happened for uke was a broken rib or two, not bad for a true no rules situation. Some of the challengers did go on to become dedicated students of his though.

The very desire to fight with someone requires one to become uke. It's a classic example of field reversal. A real nage has no such desire.

You asked a person to put some substantiation behind the words and all you get is a bunch of nonsense in return. Isn't that lethal enough for you?

Marc Abrams

Well... it certainly is just a little bit frightening I suppose. So far though I am not blinded by pure awesome....maybe he needs more noodles.....

Tenyu... I have no idea what the history lesson was about. You forgot to tie in the part about how this has anything to do with what you claim.You didn't actually answer the question. Any rate thanks for the attempt.

Sorry but I call BS. If you can't explain such an obviously abstract concept in simpler terms then you don't understand it well enough to be teaching it.

Dear Dan,
Out of curiosity I looked up the meaning of asymptote[always eager to educate myself].Having looked at the answer I have a glazed look on my face. How Tenyu can imply that this tunes in somehow with Aikido I do not know.I defy anyone to make sense of Tenyus article.The first guy to give me a rationale of what Tenyu is saying I will send him /her a coconut[in a figuratively speaking . sense].I await a horde of answers with bated breath. Cheers, Joe.

Dear Dan,
Out of curiosity I looked up the meaning of asymptote[always eager to educate myself].Having looked at the answer I have a glazed look on my face. How Tenyu can imply that this tunes in somehow with Aikido I do not know.I defy anyone to make sense of Tenyus article.The first guy to give me a rationale of what Tenyu is saying I will send him /her a coconut[in a figuratively speaking . sense].I await a horde of answers with bated breath. Cheers, Joe.

Joe,

Tom Read, who applied the concept to aikido, explains it as this: you have a runner running in a straight line as fast as he can. You tell him to turn right, maintaining his speed. He can't make a 90 degree turn at full speed. He has to curve. A stronger person can curve more sharply, but there's a limit to how much turn he can make with his mass and speed, and that curve is the "asymptote". He can't possibly pass that "barrier" described by the curve. So it's not a physical "thing" but it is a physical limit.

Applied to aikido, at least on one level, the attacker comes at you and you move to his side. He can turn toward you, but there's a limit to how sharply he can turn toward you and if you're on the other side of the "asymptote" line, he can't reach you. He can conceivably put his arm through that space, but not with full power because he's working against himself.

I'm not exactly clear on how this applies to the staff.

But I think that's the basic idea.

Best to you.

David

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu

Tom Read, who applied the concept to aikido, explains it as this: you have a runner running in a straight line as fast as he can. You tell him to turn right, maintaining his speed. He can't make a 90 degree turn at full speed. He has to curve. A stronger person can curve more sharply, but there's a limit to how much turn he can make with his mass and speed, and that curve is the "asymptote". He can't possibly pass that "barrier" described by the curve. So it's not a physical "thing" but it is a physical limit.

Applied to aikido, at least on one level, the attacker comes at you and you move to his side. He can turn toward you, but there's a limit to how sharply he can turn toward you and if you're on the other side of the "asymptote" line, he can't reach you. He can conceivably put his arm through that space, but not with full power because he's working against himself.

I'm not exactly clear on how this applies to the staff.

But I think that's the basic idea.

Best to you.

David

Hi David,
Thats why the fox/greyhound has a tail-to help them turn /change direction quickly.The tail is not just for swatting flies!The movement you describe afterwards sounds like
Irimi Nage.Thanks for the explanation -I still think that Tenyu is guilty of 'over intellectualising' Aikido. Aikido for me is not rocket science.I guess I am not scientifically minded.Maybe Tenyu could explain more is theories? I noted he stated he had developed Jo work-why not tell us more? I am always for new ideas.
Cheers, Joe.

I still think that Tenyu is guilty of 'over intellectualising' Aikido.

I think that's because these are not his ideas. Tom Read Sensei developed all these ideas and applied them to staff work and back to aikido (or that's the impression I get). There's another thread about Read's book, Aikido Aikibojitsu and the Structure of Natural Law.

It's a bit abstract for me, but I think I'd like to go through it at some point and see if I can understand his basic points. He was Tenyu's teacher, if you haven't caught that point yet. He had to boot Tenyu and Tenyu changed the name of the system and announced it as a new martial art....so it's not his own idea and he has to lean a bit too heavily on it to make his points.

Quote:

Joe Curran wrote:

Aikido for me is not rocket science.I guess I am not scientifically minded.Maybe Tenyu could explain more is theories? I noted he stated he had developed Jo work-why not tell us more? I am always for new ideas.

To make sure you get the original ideas, I'd recommend the book.

Best to you.

David

"That which has no substance can enter where there is no room."
Lao Tzu